Above is IsaiahThe World Today Just Nuts "Standing Behind McGurk"
And you know who's owned that story.
The same woman who broke the story. C.I.
I left the following comment at POLITICO today:
Amen to Ryan West. C.I. broke this story. She was the only one covering it. She covered it every day. She's the only one who wrote about the impact the nomination would have on Iraqi women (the Embassy would be cut off from them), the only one who noted that Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani would not meet with McGurk due to the affair, the only one who repeatedly pointed out the xenophobia in the US coverage that wanted to dismiss this. C.I. broke all the ground on this story. People like Dylan just stood around staring into space. Equally true, unlike Dylan and Gawker and WFB, she attended the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing and spent three days reporting on why McGurk was unqualified which included giving testimony that contradicted Leon Panetta's testimony and remarks made by National Intelligence Director James Clapper. Also, unlike PATHETICO, she pointed out McGurk's lies. Nouri al-Maliki has not given 75% of Sahwa jobs. That's a lie. And McGurk testified to it.
As usual, a woman did all the work.
PATHETICO really hates women. I'll probably include that at my blog tonight.
POLITICO has now twice credited outlets for being the first to cover the e-mails when C.I. beat both by two days.
I'm so sick of this.
I know this probably will embarrass C.I. and I'm sorry for that.
But I'm damn tired of men getting credit for 'breaking news' when a woman was the one who did. C.I. was the first to write about it. Even Cyrptome didn't have a story up, just the e-mails.
C.I.'s the one who wrote about it, she's the one who said she was told they were real. She's revealed how she found out (the Tuesday before the hearing she was in the office of a friend who serves on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee -- Democrat -- and there were whispers about the e-mails, she overheard and that's how she ended breaking the news June 5th).
But this ass at PATHETICO, this Dylan Bryer or Byer keeps crediting two other outlets who didn't even find the story until two days later.
It's a damn lie.
And I'm not going to be quiet while a woman's credit is stripped from her. I know C.I. doesn't care, I know all she cares about is that the information is out there.
But I know we care. Those of us who read her, those of us who've marveled over her ability to report for eight years now. She's reported on Article 32 hearings, she's reported on Congressional hearings. The Common Ills is one of the best resources online. Those archives are amazing. They're they equivalent -- and other sites can't claim this -- of the Washington Post or the New York Times and that's because C.I. reports on Congressional hearings.
No one does that anymore. They'll quote from a written statement and maybe not a general mood. But C.I. will report on actual exchanges in the hearings. She'll report on Congress members storming out. She'll include a variety of things.
And she's always the one to put it out there for women.
If you're a woman online, you probably owe a debt to C.I.
You go to The Nation? You notice the women blogging there? Enjoy that?
You owe a debt to Ava and C.I. who were asked by a group of feminists -- including some with a feminist site -- to address the gender imbalance at The Nation. These feminists were too scared to. They argued there would be blow back if they did it.
The two feminists who weren't scared were Ava and C.I.
They followed The Nation for a year to show how few women got published. Along the way, the magazine repeatedly offered bribes to try to get the series killed.
Reality: Ava and C.I. could be blogging for The Nation if they were whores.
Instead, they put women first.
And they got no thanks for it. All by themselves, they shamed the magazine into hiring women bloggers.
And they do that stuff all the time.
Time and again. They are Catwoman, the Michelle Pfeiffer Catwoman who will not be silenced and will not be co-opted. They are the independent agents.
So when C.I. scoops everyone and some little prick at PATHETICO won't give C.I. the credit she's earned -- it would have to be a prick, no woman would treat another woman like that -- it pisses me off.
If it's not corrected I will be blackballing POLITICO which means it will no longer be cited by any community site.
If it can't tell the truth -- and I'm not the only one who's left a comment calling this crap out -- they don't deserve to be highlighted in this community.
C.I. was the first to report on the e-mails. She earned the credit, PATHETICO better give it to her.
This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"